The speed limit poll

[GreyAngel]

Heya, let's get some quantifiable opinions on +4 kmh vs. 10 kmh debate. Coz I just frankly don't give a shit. If I speed it's never +7.5. if I'm going home after ride I do 100 coz I can put my feet down....

[superman]

With you on that, if I speed its not 105... Albeit maybe briefly.

[zeocen]

Yeah, with your Ninja 250 you might even get to 106kmph! :rolleyes:

Whingers unite.

[superman]

Yeah, with your Ninja 250 you might even get to 106kmph! :rolleyes:

Whingers unite.

I'll have you know it can reach 175 with a good tail wind! Not my fault licensing system means I have to wait 2 years for something bigger than a 250 :angry:

[onearmedbandit]

I ride to the conditions...

[The Singing Chef]

Go 175!! and yea i don't give a shit, i just notice when i see a cop i tend to shed a fair amount of speed, doesn't help that one is on the lookout for me after i took his now ex on the back. :shutup:

[Ender EnZed]

I'll have you know it can reach an indicated 175 with a good tail wind and massive speedo error! Not my fault licensing system means I have to wait 2 years for something bigger than a 250 :angry:

Fixed for you.


Also,

if I'm going home after ride I do 100 coz I can put my feet down....
I have literally no idea what you're trying to communicate with this sentence.

[zeocen]

I'll have you know it can reach 175 with a good tail wind! Not my fault licensing system means I have to wait 2 years for something bigger than a 250 :angry:

With that attitude I'm fucking thankful our licensing system means you have to be on a 250 for two years.

[bogan]

I'll have you know it can reach 175 with a good tail wind! Not my fault licensing system means I have to wait 2 years for something bigger than a 250 :angry:

Which brings up the point about speedo error, I reckon 100kmhr actual, could be up to 110 indicated on many cars, so those will slow down to 100 which is just a nudge of 90 in actuality, then those being doing 90 indicated get well angry, but can't pass because the speed differential is too low. Despite the hilarity of the movie 'drive angry' I think actually driving angry is not good for judgment and safety.
Whereas now people with over-reading speedos can happily do an actual 100 without fear of being ticketed!

[Oblivion]

To be quite honest, I never really look at the speedo. Well, I did, before I learnt how to judge speed by the engine noise. Doesn't really help the fact that I dont have a rev gauge though... :shutup:

[superman]

With that attitude I'm fucking thankful our licensing system means you have to be on a 250 for two years.

I know right! Could have killed someone, such an irresponsible prick I am! :facepalm:

[superman]

Fixed for you.

Don't ruin the dream man! :bye:

[kilgh]

My friend, fellow L-plater, got pulled over by a motorcycle officer yesterday. He was without his plate as he ditched it within a month of getting his license. (incidently superman he has the red flavour Ninja 250.)

The officer told him off and warned him to put the L-plate back on as another officer might not be so lenient. Then sent him off with a "have a nice weekend".

Odd thing was, my friend was on the motorway doing 100kph at the time!:blink:

What weird kind of holiday speed tolerance was that?:laugh:

[MrKiwi]

I don't see speeding tickets as revenue gathering :sick:

[DrunkenMistake]

I seen more police today than I did all weekend.
Besides, my Local cop down here is nothing more than a crook himself haha.

[Maha]

....yet another inane poll that results in little more than keyboard/forehead damage.

[Banditbandit]

Heya, let's get some quantifiable opinions on +4 kmh vs. 10 kmh debate. Coz I just frankly don't give a shit. If I speed it's never +7.5. if I'm going home after ride I do 100 coz I can put my feet down....

It's hard to argue that the reduction to a +4k tolerance from a +10k tolerance doesn't work - there were ZERO fatal road crashes over the Q's birthday weekend. That's a hard quantifiable result that is difficult to argue with ... (not impossible, just difficult .. I accept that there are many many valiables and speed is just one ...)

While I agree that speed doesn't necessarily kill, that means there were an awful lot of cages going slower the past weekend - and given the skill level (non-existent) of the average cage driver, slower cages has got to be a good thing.

[davebullet]

I'm particularly interested in where the fatalities are.

The best stats I've found so far are NZTA published by city and district for 2009.

For example - it appears head on collisions as a result of misjudged overtaking are far fewer than head ons caused by just being on the wrong side of the road (drifting over the centre line, cutting corners etc...)

I am particularly interested in why the police seem to focus on the Foxton straights. that's where I saw most police presence over the weekend (basically none other than the foxton straights). I wonder whether the accident and casualty rate really means its a dangerous stretch of road or just a convenient road for road users to speed and therefore earn good government revenue

[Usarka]

It's hard to argue that the reduction to a +4k tolerance from a +10k tolerance doesn't work - there were ZERO fatal road crashes over the Q's birthday weekend. That's a hard quantifiable result that is difficult to argue with ... (not impossible, just difficult .. I accept that there are many many valiables and speed is just one ...)


It's very easy to argue against that using basic statistics. To say it was the result of the tolerance change you'd need to show a significant change in the stats. That's using the statisctical definition of significant, ie a result that couldn't be explained by normal deviation.


This weekend could quite easily be the result of standard deviation. Plenty of weekends have zero road deaths throughout the year, granted not many of them are long weekends, but it's not beyond the realms of probabilities. Especially if you factor in things like the price of petrol, the economy (incl chch quake), and the weather.

Otherwise I could prove the tolerance has no effect because last years Labour weekend toll was unchanged from the year before. Therefore, it does nothing.


The only way to argue convincingly that the zero road toll was a result of the speed tolerance would be to measure over a decent sample and see if there is any significant variation. I'd suggest if you did that there would be little evidence.

[sil3nt]

I'll have you know it can reach 175 with a good tail wind! Not my fault licensing system means I have to wait 2 years for something bigger than a 250 :angry::lol: i'll have you know thats bullshit and your 175 is much closer to 150.

[superman]

:lol: i'll have you know thats bullshit and your 175 is much closer to 150.

:brick: I can't help it has such a small displacement!

[Bald Eagle]

Seems they are all going 4km faster now :facepalm:

Police urge driver caution folowing horror day on Waikato roads (http://www.police.govt.nz/news/release/28339.html)


8 June, 2011 - 07:55
08 June 2011
Waikato Police are urging the motoring public not to lose focus following a horror 24 hours on the regions roads, the day after a fatal free holiday weekend.

[oneofsix]

Seems they are all going 4km faster now :facepalm:

Police urge driver caution folowing horror day on Waikato roads (http://www.police.govt.nz/news/release/28339.html)


8 June, 2011 - 07:55
08 June 2011
Waikato Police are urging the motoring public not to lose focus following a horror 24 hours on the regions roads, the day after a fatal free holiday weekend.

Love the way they worked the motorcycle in to that article, so what if it was on a trailer. It implies the driver of the ute has something to do with motorbikes so must be bad.

[rok-the-boat]

I thought speedo error was up to 10% and that that was why they set their mark at 110. $16billion in the red = they are after more cash = 104 limit.

[Brett]

Heya, let's get some quantifiable opinions on +4 kmh vs. 10 kmh debate. Coz I just frankly don't give a shit. If I speed it's never +7.5. if I'm going home after ride I do 100 coz I can put my feet down....

Well you are certainly going to get some biased statistics here...

[Brett]

I ride to the conditions...

When they change do you reduce your speed?

[oneofsix]

When they change do you reduce your speed?

:facepalm:you sound as bad as the NZTA ad. What if the conditions get better? do you still want him to slow down?
If you ride to the conditions it means you adjust your speed, up or down, as the conditions change.

[zeocen]

I'd put some serious money on a good few of us here (and elsewhere) needing to address some other significant issues in our riding and driving before we can complain that the limit is unfoundedly reduced a few kilometres per hour.

The "lolz if I speed it's way over 104kph anywayz!111!!1~~" crowd gets first mention.

[superman]

I'd put some serious money on a good few of us here (and elsewhere) needing to address some other significant issues in our riding and driving before we can complain that the limit is unfoundedly reduced a few kilometres per hour.

The "lolz if I speed it's way over 104kph anywayz!111!!1~~" crowd gets first mention.

Yeah I should have totally added detail, 150 with my knee down on a road I'd never previously ridden on during peak hour in heavy fog. :blink:

Grow up.

[swbarnett]

The only way to argue convincingly that the zero road toll was a result of the speed tolerance would be to measure over a decent sample and see if there is any significant variation.
And even then you'd have to eliminate all other possible causes. Correllation does not mean causation.

[caseye]

If this can be put down to a lowering of the Over The Speed LIMIT TOLERANCE.All well and good, I don't care about losing a few K's per hour over the speed limit.Which almost no one anywhere adheres to anyhow.
However I believe that while the lowering of an already illegal over the speed limit tolerance may have had a part to play, i like many others believe that it is in combination with absolute Shiet weather for the first two days of the weekend, Much higher fuel costs than most ordinary folk can afford and the promise of heavier/stricter Policing.
Did anyone actually get a ticket over the weekend for speeding?
Driving to the conditions is not just about road conditions, it;s also about knowing what to expect from Mr Plod.So if you got a ticket, good job, learn.
Cause this shit aint going away.

[Toaster]

I ride to the conditions...

You get my vote!

[Toaster]

....yet another inane poll that results in little more than keyboard/forehead damage.

Yep, and all these toast crumbs came flying out of the keyboard too.

[Banditbandit]

It's very easy to argue against that using basic statistics. To say it was the result of the tolerance change you'd need to show a significant change in the stats. That's using the statisctical definition of significant, ie a result that couldn't be explained by normal deviation.


This weekend could quite easily be the result of standard deviation. Plenty of weekends have zero road deaths throughout the year, granted not many of them are long weekends, but it's not beyond the realms of probabilities. Especially if you factor in things like the price of petrol, the economy (incl chch quake), and the weather.

Otherwise I could prove the tolerance has no effect because last years Labour weekend toll was unchanged from the year before. Therefore, it does nothing.


The only way to argue convincingly that the zero road toll was a result of the speed tolerance would be to measure over a decent sample and see if there is any significant variation. I'd suggest if you did that there would be little evidence.

While I probably agree with you - I meant it's hard to argue with the capitalist state's enforcement arm - 'cause "it worked" - and they won't accept any other position ...

[oneofsix]

While I probably agree with you - I meant it's hard to argue with the capitalist state's enforcement arm - 'cause "it worked" - and they won't accept any other position ...

+1 their bonus/position is based on the 'fact' that it worked. Now the British idea of necklacing the fixed speed cameras, thereby making them more expensive to use than the revenue they bring in .... ummm

[Maha]

Yep, and all these toast crumbs came flying out of the keyboard too.

Which brings me to my second point, wear safety glasses when viewing polls on KB.

[swbarnett]

Cause this shit aint going away.
Only because most of us have better things to worry about. I just hope they push it far enough in one step that the average apathetic Kiwi is motivated into action.

[thepom]

yeah but how many joe public,s got caught out by plod hiding behind rubbish skip,s and ticketing people coming in both directions in a 30 zone......safety not an issue just revenue gathering....:shit:

[scumdog]

yeah but how many joe public,s got caught out by plod hiding behind rubbish skip,s and ticketing people coming in both directions in a 30 zone......safety not an issue just revenue gathering....:shit:


Only for those silly or inattentive enough to get caught...

[Ender EnZed]

Only for those silly or inattentive enough to get caught...

My x-ray vision doesn't work through rubbish skips.

[Oblivion]

Which brings me to my second point, wear safety glasses when viewing polls on KB.

<img src="http://media.tapirpirates.net/f/KeyboardFaceSmash.gif"/>

[neels]

Funniest thing I saw in the weekend was the driver in front of me hitting the picks to slow down from 60k to 45k when passing a stationery police car in a 70k zone.

So the publicity of the reduced tolerance increasing peoples paranoia about getting a ticket obviously worked, as for increasing peoples awareness of the speed limit and how fast they are actually going, not so much.

[Brett]

:facepalm:you sound as bad as the NZTA ad. What if the conditions get better? do you still want him to slow down?
If you ride to the conditions it means you adjust your speed, up or down, as the conditions change.

Speed kills don't ya know?

I personally never exceed 100kph. Ever. Never ever.

[jafar]

Speed kills don't ya know?

Speed doesn't kill. It's the sudden stop that does it:yes:

[varminter]

[QUOTE=neels;1130083080]Funniest thing I saw in the weekend was the driver in front of me hitting the picks to slow down from 60k to 45k when passing a stationery police car in a 70k zone.

Yep, I've noticed that. It's as if drivers think that they get brownie points for going slower than the limit:facepalm:

[scumdog]

[QUOTE=neels;1130083080]Funniest thing I saw in the weekend was the driver in front of me hitting the picks to slow down from 60k to 45k when passing a stationery police car in a 70k zone.

Yep, I've noticed that. It's as if drivers think that they get brownie points for going slower than the limit:facepalm:

No, it's because Police cars have a special mystery device that sucks horsepower from any car nearby...:shutup:

[caseye]

Just watch what yer saying there scumdog, stranger things have happened. Remember Kirks intercom thing. it morphed into a cell phone.
Those horse power sucking things? they're nearly perfected in the states.EMP's they call em.

[Brett]

Speed doesn't kill. It's the sudden stop that does it:yes:

I stop suddenly all the time and yet am alive....

I tell ya what does choke my goat....unmarked road works at night. Hit a 20m long patch of gravel just on corner exit just out of Papakura, Nothing like the back wheel trying to overtake you at speed to make a night interesting.

[scumdog]

I stop suddenly all the time and yet am alive....

I tell ya what does choke my goat....unmarked road works at night. Hit a 20m long patch of gravel just on corner exit just out of Papakura, Nothing like the back wheel trying to overtake you at speed to make a night interesting.

Well if it ended up in a sudden stop you wouldn't be worried eh?

[MSTRS]

There are so many factors at work in any (potential) crash.
For last weekend's (zero) toll, point at foul weather keeping the crowds home, fear of extra filth about, no money for the extra petrol, improving safety rating of the general fleet...amongst others.
The biggie is simple chance. Monitoring for deaths during any particular period over time will show a variety of results.
Anyone who thinks a 5kph reduced tolerance is the reason for zero road deaths is arguably certifiable.

[Mad-V2]

It's hard enough these days with all the "your speed" signs everywhere! there's one in Hastings that said SLOW DOWN!!! and I was doing around 48 in my truck.
There's another one in Napier that says I'm doing 50 when I'm sitting on 55 :scratch:
I wouldn't have a clue if I'm speeding anymore. :brick:

[Brett]

Well if it ended up in a sudden stop you wouldn't be worried eh?

I suppose you are not incorrect.

[cold comfort]

"That is concerning for us given the number one killer on Waikato roads so far this year has been a loss of concentration by drivers resulting in the crossing over of the centre-line which is what happened overnight."

So the 10k tolerance would the other one then?

[davebullet]

"That is concerning for us given the number one killer on Waikato roads so far this year has been a loss of concentration by drivers resulting in the crossing over of the centre-line which is what happened overnight."

So the 10k tolerance would the other one then?

I think that proves the point how meaningless a temporary reduction in tolerance is.

I mean 2 vehilces colliding head on at a combined speed of 220kph will have the same result for the occupants as 2 colliding at a combined speed of 200kph

[scumdog]

I think that proves the point how meaningless a temporary reduction in tolerance is.

I mean 2 vehilces colliding head on at a combined speed of 220kph will have the same result for the occupants as 2 colliding at a combined speed of 200kph

Risking you are trolling but I think if people keep their speed down then the chance of them colliding head on is reduced by a certain amount.

If it all hinges around impact speed then I say knock the open road speed limit down to 65kph, ensures greater survivalibity....

[Swoop]

For last weekend's (zero) toll, point at foul weather, fear of extra filth about, no money for the extra petrol, improving safety rating of the general fleet...amongst others.
The biggie is simple chance.
Chance of Paula Rose attempting to take the credit though?:facepalm:
Chance of the idiots in Wellytown believing her crap?:pinch:

[Scuba_Steve]

Risking you are trolling but I think if people keep their speed down then the chance of them colliding head on is reduced by a certain amount.


True in theory but reality is a whole new ball game. Studies (& driver behavior) would suggest otherwise, the slower people travel the less attention they pay to the road.
"ohhh look at the pretty scenery", "ahh I'm not traveling that fast I have time to adjust the radio" etc etc, you get the point I'm sure

[oneofsix]

True in theory but reality is a whole new ball game. Studies (& driver behavior) would suggest otherwise, the slower people travel the less attention they pay to the road.
"ohhh look at the pretty scenery", "ahh I'm not traveling that fast I have time to adjust the radio" etc etc, you get the point I'm sure

wonder if you aren't both right. The type of accident changes but the numbers dead remain about the same. Loss of control through loss of traction reduces. Loss of road position through lack of attention increases. This from a Defensive Driving instructor 30 years ago so its not like it anything new.
I see the lack of attention if verified along SH1 , Paekakriki to Pukerua Bay, constantly. People used to drive that section at 100k and take the corners at those speeds, now they have dropped the limit to 80k the same drivers seem to struggle to take the same corners at 80k because they aren't concentrating on their driving as much and the corners 'surprise' them.

[MSTRS]

Chance of Paula Rose attempting to take the credit though?:facepalm:

100%


Chance of the idiots in Wellytown believing her crap?:pinch:
Almost 0%. Surely only the braindead public are stupid enough to believe it?
As for the Shiny Arses in Wellytown - cynicism tells me that they believe 100% in the propaganda of it all.

[martybabe]

Cause this shit aint going away.

I concur, some previous holidays have had no improvement at all in fatality reduction, some have had more and some (the last one) less.

That makes it inconclusive in my book but not so the Police woman person that claims a reduction last Holiday is proof that it is working. Ergo, Step 1. we will impose reduced tolerance for speeding as an experiment for one holiday. step 2. we will impose a reduced tolerance for speeding on all holidays.and finally. step 3. we will impose a reduced tolerance for speeding permanently across the board.

I applaud any reduction in road fatalities but just because some Senior Police woman claims it is working does not make it so.

Meanwhile, back in the world less fantastical, the carnage caused by bad driving, bad riding and bad pedestrianing continues largely unabated because much as some would like it to be a one fix solution, it unfortunately is far more complex than that.

The fixation on speeding as the root of all evil and the primary cause of fatal accidents is a falsehood. Bad driving, in whatever form is the primary cause of the carnage on our roads and that ain't ever going to go away by pointing cameras at Traffic to collect coin, that is only ever going to go away by a complete overhaul of driving practices/ training and licencing.

I stand to be corrected but NZ, I believe, has 2-3 times the road based Fatalities that the UK has (per capita). If the powers that be believe that having a nation drive around religiously stuck on 100kph will bring us any nearer that record, then they are fooling themselves.

[davebullet]

Risking you are trolling but I think if people keep their speed down then the chance of them colliding head on is reduced by a certain amount.

If it all hinges around impact speed then I say knock the open road speed limit down to 65kph, ensures greater survivalibity....

Naa - wasn't trying troll.

I haven't had enough time to draw any conclusions from published NZTA data to whether there is any correlation between crossing the centre line cause of accident WITH excessive speed.

An initial assumption is no - because the number of accidents caused from overtaking is quite low compared to crossing the centre line. One assumes to overtake means one of the vehicles has to speed up (and invariably will exceed the limit doing so).

Ok - risking labouring the obvious.... I think slow drivers might cause more accidents due to their attention span being used elsewhere (reminds me of Keith Code's $10 of attention). However, slower drivers would contribute to less fatalities due to slower speeds of collision.

[Swoop]

I stand to be corrected but NZ, I believe, has 2-3 times the road based Fatalities that the UK has (per capita).
The joke is the pathetic training and testing scheme we have in NZ.
Not that our retards in Wellytown will comprehend that though.

[davebullet]

II stand to be corrected but NZ, I believe, has 2-3 times the road based Fatalities that the UK has (per capita). If the powers that be believe that having a nation drive around religiously stuck on 100kph will bring us any nearer that record, then they are fooling themselves.

And of those crashes (may be fatalities I can't recall) in either country - the UK has a higher percentage that are motorcycle related than in NZ.

[MarkH]

I thought speedo error was up to 10% and that that was why they set their mark at 110.

The speedo is no problem, it would be rare to find any speedo that reads slower than the actual speed - they pretty much all read high to a varying degree. But the human controlling the vehicle - that is a different story! You really can't keep to an exact speed (to the nearest 1 kph) without some sort of computer controlling the speed for you, so your speed will vary a little. It isn't too hard to keep your speed within 10kph of what you are trying to do, but within 4kph is much harder. No one is to blame for some variation in the speed, human beings just aren't as precise as computers - some tolerance for that fact and a little leeway for goodwill sake and most road users are reasonably happy. 4kph tolerance - that's just bullshit IMO.

[martybabe]

And of those crashes (may be fatalities I can't recall) in either country - the UK has a higher percentage that are motorcycle related than in NZ.

I tried to find the facts on that as it seemed an interesting point but I got bogged down with site after site of possible causes rather than simple comparable data. Never mind, here's an interesting little back on topic paragraph I found along the way.


Despite the current concentration on enforcing speed limits to reduce accidents, "Exceeding the speed limit" is a factor in only 4% of accidents, with "Travelling too fast for the conditions" a factor in 8% of accidents, way behind "Failing to look properly" (15%), "Loss of control" (14%), "Failed to judge other person's path or speed" (11%), "Careless, reckless or in a hurry" (11%), or "Poor turn or manoeuvre" (10%).

This Data is for Motorcycle crashes and the cause thereof in the UK. There you go then, 4% of motorcycle accidents in the UK can be attributed to exceeding the speed limit, which leaves 96% that had nothing to do with breaking the speed limit.

A little more attention paid to the other 96% of causes of accidents would seem a prudent exercise then. The constant fixation on speed limit enforcement to reduce road tolls would seem a waste of resources given that the best result you could achieve would be a 4% reduction in crashes.whereas any other single aspect of the causation of crashes would give better returns, teaching people to look properly at junctions for example.

I don't have all the answers, no one does but we are at least all agreed that whatever the fatality figure, it's one to many. Blindly throwing all the blame on one minor contributory factor though isn't going to fix the problem eh.

[swbarnett]

wonder if you aren't both right. The type of accident changes but the numbers dead remain about the same.
Not necessaily so. It is my understanding that the US actually experienced a reduction in the number of dead after raising or removing interstate speed limits.

[swbarnett]

I stand to be corrected but NZ, I believe, has 2-3 times the road based Fatalities that the UK has (per capita).
I don't have a problem with this if it is also true, as I'm led to believe, that we travel more than they do.

[swbarnett]

However, slower drivers would contribute to less fatalities due to slower speeds of collision.
Not necessarily. It is a given that a slow collisions are less likely to result in a fatality. However, if the increased number of collisions outweighs the reduction in said probability the resulting number of fatalities will be higher.

[oneofsix]

I don't have a problem with this if it is also true, as I'm led to believe, that we travel more than they do.

Don't know if it is true but a few years ago I was told that per km travelled we have a lower or at least comparable accident rate.

[oneofsix]

Not necessaily so. It is my understanding that the US actually experienced a reduction in the number of dead after raising or removing interstate speed limits.

umm is that a third side to the debut? If memory serves the original was the present limit verses going slower. You are suggesting that having no or raising the limit to were the driver isn't so busy concentrating on their speedo they can look after the other 96% of the dangers, as quoted in martybabe's post.

[Scuba_Steve]

Not necessaily so. It is my understanding that the US actually experienced a reduction in the number of dead after raising or removing interstate speed limits.

Yes well the opposite did occur when them & Oz introduced limits
I think da US saw a 60% increase in fatalities after listening to the propaganda & took their open road to speed limited & Oz had an increase of 70% after introducing limits... limits save lives aye :facepalm:



Despite the current concentration on enforcing speed limits to reduce accidents, "Exceeding the speed limit" is a factor in only 4% of accidents, with "Travelling too fast for the conditions" a factor in 8% of accidents, way behind "Failing to look properly" (15%), "Loss of control" (14%), "Failed to judge other person's path or speed" (11%), "Careless, reckless or in a hurry" (11%), or "Poor turn or manoeuvre" (10%).


Don't forget in NZ less than 30% of fatalities include "speed" &/or Drink driving, so both factors combined (& I believe "speed" was exceeding the limit & too fast for conditions?) was present in less than 30% of all fatalities on NZ roads


Don't know if it is true but a few years ago I was told that per km travelled we have a lower or at least comparable accident rate.

I think that might have been in a AA Directions mag year or so back???